[cvsnt] Merging branch with identical versions still changes

Glen Starrett grstarrett at cox.net
Fri Nov 7 16:57:40 GMT 2003

Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.

> Rather than abstract someone else's work, I urge you to study 
> this section:

I've previously read that, actually.  Re-reading it again with knowledge and
experience in working with it makes it clear to me that the text is __very__
out of date relative to CVSNT.  Mergepoints have eliminated the need to tag
before branches and after merges, so 3/4 of the volume of text in those
sections is unnecessary (tag, tag, remember which tag, and keyword expansion
is no longer the enemy).  I'm thinking the cvsnt wiki could use another
update with some of that information...

> As long as your developers are frequently doing a 'cvs update -j HEAD' on
> branch, and cleaning up any conflicts, then it is very unlikely that any 
> conflicts (either textual or semantic) will occur when their branch is
> back to the trunk.  It just seems to me like you are waiting to do that
> the last moment (when you are ready to merge the branch).

I'm always telling my devs to update more often, but they don't always
listen :).  We also divide the functions individuals are working on to
minimize conflicts which prevents the majority of issues right away.  Until
they are ready to call their code complete, they are often reluctant to
update and potentially break their sandbox.  I certainly agree though that
it is MUCH better to update often than have a long-lived branch that ends up
with a lot of conflicts (or worse, non-conflicting logic changes).

Definitely a thought-provoking discussion.  Thanks!


Glen Starrett

More information about the cvsnt mailing list
Download the latest CVSNT, TortosieCVS, WinCVS etc. for Windows 8 etc.
@CVSNT on Twitter   CVSNT on Facebook